Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Tay AK, Miah MAA, Khan S, Badrudduza M, Morgan K, Balasundaram S, et al.
    Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci, 2019 Aug 23;29:e47.
    PMID: 31441397 DOI: 10.1017/S2045796019000416
    AIMS: Refugees are confronted with the task of adapting to the long-term erosion of psychosocial systems and institutions that in stable societies support psychological well-being and mental health. We provide an overview of the theoretical principles and practical steps taken to develop a novel psychotherapeutic approach, Integrative Adapt Therapy (IAT), which aims to assist refugees to adapt to these changes. This paper offers the background informing ongoing trials of IAT amongst refugees from Myanmar.

    METHODS: A systematic process was followed in formulating the therapy and devising a treatment manual consistent with the principles of the Adaptation and Development After Persecution and Trauma (ADAPT) model. The process of development and refinement was based on qualitative research amongst 70 refugees (ten from West Papua and 60 Rohingya from Myanmar). The therapeutic process was then piloted by trained interventionists amongst a purposively selected sample of 20 Rohingya refugees in Malaysia.

    RESULTS: The final formulation of IAT represented an integration of the principles of the ADAPT model and evidence-based techniques of modern therapies in the field, including a transdiagnostic approach and the selective use of cognitive behavioural treatment elements such as problem-solving and emotional regulation techniques. The steps outlined in refining the manual are outlined in relation to work amongst West Papuan refugees, and the process of cultural and contextual modifications described during early piloting with Rohingya refugees in Malaysia.

    CONCLUSIONS: IAT integrates universal principles of the ADAPT model with the particularities of the culture, history of conflict and living context of each refugee community; this synthesis of knowledge forms the basis for participants gaining insights into their personal patterns of psychosocial adaptation to the refugee experience. Participants then apply evidence-based techniques to improve their capacity to adapt to the serial psychosocial changes they have encountered in their lives as refugees. The overarching goal of IAT is to provide refugees with a coherent framework that assists in making sense of their experiences and their emotional and interpersonal reactions to the challenges they confront within the family and community context. As such, the principles of a general model (ADAPT) are used as a springboard for making concrete, manageable and meaningful life changes at the individual level, a potentially novel approach for psychosocial interventions in the field.

  2. Tay AK, Rees S, Miah MAA, Khan S, Badrudduza M, Morgan K, et al.
    Transl Psychiatry, 2019 09 02;9(1):213.
    PMID: 31477686 DOI: 10.1038/s41398-019-0537-z
    A major challenge in the refugee field is to ensure that scarce mental health resources are directed to those in greatest need. Based on data from an epidemiological survey of 959 adult Rohingya refugees in Malaysia (response rate: 83%), we examine whether a brief screening instrument of functional impairment, the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS), prove useful as a proxy measure to identify refugees who typically attend community mental health services. Based on estimates of mental disorder requiring interventions from analyses of epidemiological studies conducted worldwide, we selected a WHODAS cutoff that identified the top one-fifth of refugees according to severity of functional impairment, the remainder being distributed to moderate and lower impairment groupings, respectively. Compared to the lower impairment grouping, the severe impairment category comprised more boat arrivals (AOR: 5.96 [95% CI 1.34-26.43); stateless persons (A20·11 [95% CI 7.14-10); those with high exposure to pre-migration traumas (AOR: 4.76 [95% CI 1.64-13.73), peri-migration stressors (AOR: 1.26 [95% CI 1.14-1.39]) and postmigration living difficulties (AOR: 1.43 [95% CI 1.32-1.55); persons with single (AOR: 7.48 [95% CI 4.25-13.17]) and comorbid (AOR: 13.54 [95% CI 6.22-29.45]) common mental disorders; and those reporting poorer general health (AOR: 2.23 [95% CI 1-5.02]). In addition, half of the severe impairment grouping (50.6%) expressed suicidal ideas compared to one in six (16.2 percent) of the lower impairment grouping (OR: 2.39 [95% CI 1.94-2.93]). Differences between the severe and moderate impairment groups were similar but less extreme. In settings where large-scale epidemiological studies are not feasible, the WHODAS may serve as readily administered and brief public health screening tool that assists in stratifying the population according to urgency of mental health needs.
  3. Tay AK, Miah MAA, Khan S, Mohsin M, Alam ANMM, Ozen S, et al.
    EClinicalMedicine, 2021 Aug;38:100999.
    PMID: 34505027 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100999
    Background: Studies of scalable psychological interventions in humanitarian setting are usually carried out when the acute emergency has stabilized. We report the first evaluation of an evidence-based group psychological intervention, Group Integrative Adapt Therapy (IAT-G), during the emergency phase of a mass humanitarian crisis amongst Rohingya refugees in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. Methods: We did a pragmatic naturalistic evaluation (2018-2020) of a seven-session group intervention with adult Rohingya refugees with elevated symptoms of depression (≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire) and/or posttraumatic stress disorder, PTSD, (≥3 on the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder-8), and functional impairment (≥17 on WHO Disability Assessment Schedule or WHODAS-brief). Screening was done across the most densely populated campsites. Blind assessments were completed at baseline, posttreatment, and at 3-month follow-up using culturally adapted measures of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress symptoms, complicated bereavement, adaptive stress associated with disrupted psychosocial support systems, functional impairment, and resilience. Findings: 383 persons were screened and of the 144 persons who met inclusion criteria all participated in the group intervention. Compared to baseline scores, IAT-G participants recorded significantly lower mean scores on key outcome indices (mental health symptoms, adaptive stress, and functional impairment) at posttreatment and 3-month follow-up (all pairwise tests significant Ps
  4. Tay AK, Mung HK, Miah MAA, Balasundaram S, Ventevogel P, Badrudduza M, et al.
    PLoS Med, 2020 Mar;17(3):e1003073.
    PMID: 32231364 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003073
    BACKGROUND: This randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to compare 6-week posttreatment outcomes of an Integrative Adapt Therapy (IAT) to a Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) on common mental health symptoms and adaptive capacity amongst refugees from Myanmar. IAT is grounded on psychotherapeutic elements specific to the refugee experience.

    METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a single-blind RCT (October 2017 -May 2019) with Chin (39.3%), Kachin (15.7%), and Rohingya (45%) refugees living in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The trial included 170 participants receiving six 45-minute weekly sessions of IAT (97.6% retention, 4 lost to follow-up) and 161 receiving a multicomponent CBT also involving six 45-minute weekly sessions (96.8% retention, 5 lost to follow-up). Participants (mean age: 30.8 years, SD = 9.6) had experienced and/or witnessed an average 10.1 types (SD = 5.9, range = 1-27) of traumatic events. We applied a single-blind design in which independent assessors of pre- and posttreatment indices were masked in relation to participants' treatment allocation status. Primary outcomes were symptom scores of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Complex PTSD (CPTSD), Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), the 5 scales of the Adaptive Stress Index (ASI), and a measure of resilience (the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale [CDRS]). Compared to CBT, an intention-to-treat analysis (n = 331) at 6-week posttreatment follow-up demonstrated greater reductions in the IAT arm for all common mental disorder (CMD) symptoms and ASI domains except for ASI-3 (injustice), as well as increases in the resilience scores. Adjusted average treatment effects assessing the differences in posttreatment scores between IAT and CBT (with baseline scores as covariates) were -0.08 (95% CI: -0.14 to -0.02, p = 0.012) for PTSD, -0.07 (95% CI: -0.14 to -0.01) for CPTSD, -0.07 for MDD (95% CI: -0.13 to -0.01, p = 0.025), 0.16 for CDRS (95% CI: 0.06-0.026, p ≤ 0.001), -0.12 (95% CI: -0.20 to -0.03, p ≤ 0.001) for ASI-1 (safety/security), -0.10 for ASI-2 (traumatic losses; 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.02, p = 0.02), -0.03 for ASI-3 (injustice; (95% CI: -0.11 to 0.06, p = 0.513), -0.12 for ASI-4 (role/identity disruptions; 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.04, p ≤ 0.001), and -0.18 for ASI-5 (existential meaning; 95% CI: -0.19 to -0.05, p ≤ 0.001). Compared to CBT, the IAT group had larger effect sizes for all indices (except for resilience) including PTSD (IAT, d = 0.93 versus CBT, d = 0.87), CPTSD (d = 1.27 versus d = 1.02), MDD (d = 1.4 versus d = 1.11), ASI-1 (d = 1.1 versus d = 0.85), ASI-2 (d = 0.81 versus d = 0.66), ASI-3 (d = 0.49 versus d = 0.42), ASI-4 (d = 0.86 versus d = 0.67), and ASI-5 (d = 0.72 versus d = 0.53). No adverse events were recorded for either therapy. Limitations include a possible allegiance effect (the authors inadvertently conveying disproportionate enthusiasm for IAT in training and supervision), cross-over effects (counsellors applying elements of one therapy in delivering the other), and the brief period of follow-up.

    CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CBT, IAT showed superiority in improving mental health symptoms and adaptative stress from baseline to 6-week posttreatment. The differences in scores between IAT and CBT were modest and future studies conducted by independent research teams need to confirm the findings.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered under Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (http://www.anzctr.org.au/). The trial registration number is: ACTRN12617001452381.

  5. Szczuka Z, Abraham C, Baban A, Brooks S, Cipolletta S, Danso E, et al.
    BMC Public Health, 2021 10 05;21(1):1791.
    PMID: 34610808 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-11822-5
    BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected people's engagement in health behaviors, especially those that protect individuals from SARS-CoV-2 transmission, such as handwashing/sanitizing. This study investigated whether adherence to the World Health Organization's (WHO) handwashing guidelines (the outcome variable) was associated with the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic, as measured by the following 6 indicators: (i) the number of new cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality (a country-level mean calculated for the 14 days prior to data collection), (ii) total cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality accumulated since the onset of the pandemic, and (iii) changes in recent cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality (a difference between country-level COVID-19 morbidity/mortality in the previous 14 days compared to cases recorded 14-28 days earlier).

    METHODS: The observational study (#NCT04367337) enrolled 6064 adults residing in Australia, Canada, China, France, Gambia, Germany, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Switzerland. Data on handwashing adherence across 8 situations (indicated in the WHO guidelines) were collected via an online survey (March-July 2020). Individual-level handwashing data were matched with the date- and country-specific values of the 6 indices of the trajectory of COVID-19 pandemic, obtained from the WHO daily reports.

    RESULTS: Multilevel regression models indicated a negative association between both accumulation of the total cases of COVID-19 morbidity (B = -.041, SE = .013, p = .013) and mortality (B = -.036, SE = .014 p = .002) and handwashing. Higher levels of total COVID-related morbidity and mortality were related to lower handwashing adherence. However, increases in recent cases of COVID-19 morbidity (B = .014, SE = .007, p = .035) and mortality (B = .022, SE = .009, p = .015) were associated with higher levels of handwashing adherence. Analyses controlled for participants' COVID-19-related situation (their exposure to information about handwashing, being a healthcare professional), sociodemographic characteristics (gender, age, marital status), and country-level variables (strictness of containment and health policies, human development index). The models explained 14-20% of the variance in handwashing adherence.

    CONCLUSIONS: To better explain levels of protective behaviors such as handwashing, future research should account for indicators of the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.Gov, # NCT04367337.

  6. Luszczynska A, Szczuka Z, Abraham C, Baban A, Brooks S, Cipolletta S, et al.
    Ann Behav Med, 2021 Dec 06.
    PMID: 34871341 DOI: 10.1093/abm/kaab102
    BACKGROUND: Patterns of protective health behaviors, such as handwashing and sanitizing during the COVID-19 pandemic, may be predicted by macro-level variables, such as regulations specified by public health policies. Health behavior patterns may also be predicted by micro-level variables, such as self-regulatory cognitions specified by health behavior models, including the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA).

    PURPOSE: This study explored whether strictness of containment and health policies was related to handwashing adherence and whether such associations were mediated by HAPA-specified self-regulatory cognitions.

    METHODS: The study (NCT04367337) was conducted among 1,256 adults from Australia, Canada, China, France, Gambia, Germany, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Switzerland. Self-report data on cross-situational handwashing adherence were collected using an online survey at two time points, 4 weeks apart. Values of the index of strictness of containment and health policies, obtained from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker database, were retrieved twice for each country (1 week prior to individual data collection).

    RESULTS: Across countries and time, levels of handwashing adherence and strictness of policies were high. Path analysis indicated that stricter containment and health policies were indirectly related to lower handwashing adherence via lower self-efficacy and self-monitoring. Less strict policies were indirectly related to higher handwashing adherence via higher self-efficacy and self-monitoring.

    CONCLUSIONS: When policies are less strict, exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus might be higher, triggering more self-regulation and, consequently, more handwashing adherence. Very strict policies may need to be accompanied by enhanced information dissemination or psychosocial interventions to ensure appropriate levels of self-regulation.

Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links